Social Sciences and HumanitiesResearch Council of Canada

Conseil de recherches ensciences humaines du Canada

SSHRC Information Session

Standard Research Grant Program

Information session with Trent University

Given by Stéphanie Sweetland Monday, May 4th, 2009

2

What’s new at SSHRC? Standard Research Grants Program

• Overview• How to apply • Tips

General overview of other SSHRC Programs offered by SPJI (optional)

The Presentation Overview

Social Sciences and HumanitiesResearch Council of Canada

Conseil de recherches ensciences humaines du Canada

What’s New at SSHRC?

3

What’s New at SSHRC

Blue Ribbon Panel Targeted research funding

– Environment and the North

Strategic Review– RTS

– Funding related to health research

4

Blue Ribbon Panel

SSHRC’s peer-review process underwent a thorough evaluation by an independent, arm’s length group composed of internationally recognized experts on peer review

Extensive consultations were conducted with experts, in addition to a survey completed by more than 6000 researchers in the SSH community

Conclusion: peer review at SSHRC is up to the best practices and highest international standards

Nonetheless, changes were recommended, and we are working towards their implementation

Available online at http://www.sshrc.ca/site/about-crsh/peer-pairs/index-eng.aspx

5

Targeted Research Funding

Northern Communities: Towards Social and Economic Prosperity• Programs TBA (Fall 2009)

• Jacques Critchley 613-992-5145

• jacques.critchley@sshrc-crsh.gc.ca

Canadian Environmental Issues• Programs TBA (Fall 2009)

• Mathieu Ravignat 613-947-3724

• mathieu.ravignat@sshrc-crsh.gc.ca

6

Strategic Review

A process which requires all government departments and agencies to review all program spending, and to assess how and whether these programs are aligned with core mandates, and how they are effective, efficient and meet the priorities of Canadians.

SSHRC, CIHR and NSERC underwent the process this past year.

7

Results of Strategic Review - RTS

Research Time Stipends (RTS) are no longer available in any of our programs

Note that:– those RTS granted prior to April 1, 2009 will be

respected

– this decision does not affect salary replacements for non-academic participants in SSHRC-funded research projects (for example, staff in community organizations participating in CURA projects).

8

Results of Strategic Review – Funding to Health Related Research

SSHRC funding is reduced for health-related research that is eligible under the mandate of CIHR– Spending reductions will apply to all SSHRC

programs: research grants, knowledge mobilization and communication grants and fellowships.

– Modification of SRG committee structure • Cttees 10 & 27 (Psychology 1 and 2)• Cttee 20 (Health studies and social work)

– Please consult our website throughout the summer and fall for information about how our programs will be affected

9

Social Sciences and HumanitiesResearch Council of Canada

Conseil de recherches ensciences humaines du Canada

Standard Research Grants Program

10

11

To support:

Programs of research

Training of future researchers

New theoretical or methodological approaches

Disciplinary and multidisciplinary research

Communication of research results both within & beyond academia

Objectives of the Standard Research Grants Program

12

Funding of a Program of Research Team and individual applications Three-year cycle Maximum $100,000 per year / $250,000 over 3 years Peer-reviewed

Characteristics

Steps of the Peer Review Process

13

Notice of Intent

Communication of Results

Research Office

SSHRC

External Review

Committee Members

Committee Adjudication

Program Officers

Select committee members Determine eligibility of files Select external assessors Coordinate committee work Prepare results

14

15

Goal - Two Assessors per file

How they are chosen:– Suggested assessors– Assessors’ expertise– Exclusion of external assessors– Must adhere to conflict of interest guidelines

External Assessors

16

Overall competence and credibility; scholarly stature

Appropriate representation on the basis of:– areas of expertise

– university size (small, medium, large)

– geographical region (Canada and abroad)

– language

– Gender

– Must adhere to conflict of interest guidelines

– Normally serve 3 years, work for free

Committee Members

Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts of interest– a close friend

– a relative

– a research collaborator

– an institutional colleague

– a student previously under the applicant’s supervision

– a person with whom the applicant is involved in a dispute

– a person with whom the applicant is involved in a partnership

• http://www.sshrc.ca/site/about-crsh/peer-pairs/conflicts-conflits-eng.aspx

17

Pre Adjudication

Teleconference Assignment of Readers A & B Preliminary Scores for Record of Research

Achievement and Program of Research Flagging of the files

18

Flagging Criteria

Significant discrepancy between scores of both readers;

Significant discrepancy between scores and assessors’s comments;

Research tools; No external assessment; Any other issue raised by a member or program

officer.

19

2009 Adjudication in Ottawa

No discussion of files in top 15% after initial ranking unless flagged – except for budget

No discussion of files in bottom 35% after initial ranking unless flagged

Final ranking and scores

20

21

2009 Standard Research Grants Competition Results

2,880 eligible applications, 941 awards (including 26 awards to new scholars in Environment and North)

Overall success rate of 32.7% but variation across committees

Average three-year award of $83,712 Limits placed on number of applicants on the

alternate or 4A list

To consider when applying

Eligibility Committee selection

22

Research subject must meet SSHRC’s mandate Affiliation with a Canadian post-secondary

institution (no citizenship requirement) Postdocs must be affiliated by April 15 PhD candidates in final year (file will be flagged) Submission of Final Research Report

23

Eligibility Requirements

24

Choose from the adjudication committee list http://www.sshrc.ca/site/about-crsh/committees-comites/st

andard_research-ordinaire_recherche-eng.aspx

Membership available on line Committee 15 (interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary

committee)– Not a “catch-all” committee

– Fully explain the inter- or multi-disciplinary nature of proposal

– SSHRC reserves the right to determine final placement

Choosing a Committee

Changes in SRG Committees 2009-2010

Quality peer review Committee 24 Political Science and

Committee 2 History – Because of an increasingly large number of

applications, there is a strong possibility that both of these committees will be split.

• Committee 20 Health Studies and Social Work will be restructured in lieu of funding changes to health related research

Please consult our website for the latest information on committees and their program mandates

25

26

Score weighting – 60/40% or 40/60%

New Scholars:

Must not have been awarded, as a principal

investigator, a SRG, MCRI or a Strategic Grant AND

Must have completed highest degree less than five

years OR

Held tenure-track position less than 5 years OR

Never had a tenure-track position OR

Had career interrupted or delayed for family reasons

New Scholars vs Regular Scholars

Career Interruptions and Special Circumstances

Productivity stopped/productivity slowed Personal reasons - serious health problems,

death in family, maternity or parenting leave Professional reasons - heavy teaching load Committee discretion

27

28

Contributions from last 6 years unless career was interrupted Quality and significance of published work Originality and impact of previous research Quantity of research activity Importance of other scholarly activities Recentness of output and consistency of output Dissemination to non-academic audiences where relevant Productivity from previous grant(s) Training of future researchers

Evaluation of the Record of Research Achievement

29

Follow the instructions re format and page limitations Categorize your publications: refereed, non-refereed, etc. Avoid “inflating” the CV Indicate productivity from previous grants Be honest and specific about forthcoming items

Presenting your Curriculum Vitae

Team Applications

Applicant should demonstrate need for team and outline each person’s role

Each member assessed but collaborators do not factor into score

Applicant must be qualified; cannot rely on experience of co-applicant

30

31

Originality & contribution to advancement of knowledge

Appropriateness of the theoretical approaches/framework

Appropriateness of the research strategies/methodologies

Quality of the literature review

Suitability of plans to communicate research results

The nature, extent and benefit of research training

Evaluation of the Program of Research

32

Clear and precise objectives Clear theoretical framework or conceptual approach Explain and justify methodology (where appropriate),

establish relationship between objectives, methodology and budget

Define all key terms or concepts Include a complete literature review Append a bibliography

Presenting your Program of Research

Summary Page

Clearly indicate the purpose, the objectives, the context for and potential impact of the proposed research

Used by committee members and for publicity purposes; think generalists!

Avoid jargon or technical terms

33

34

Reasonable and fully justified budget Check Tri-Council list of eligible and ineligible expenses

http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/Professors-Professeurs/FinancialAdminGuide-GuideAdminFinancier/index_eng.asp

Explain and justify costs Link between research objectives and budget

Budget

Characteristics of a Successful Application

Clarity: application is well written, well organized and error free

Originality: application is challenging, interesting, ambitious yet feasible

Importance of research is clear Impact it will make is stated Presented confidently not boastfully

35

Common Problems

Application is “premature” Seems like a fishing expedition Project is too ambitious Methodology is inappropriate, too vaguely

described Theoretical rationale is lacking Project is not adequately contextualized Not clear how proposed work differs from

previous work

36

37

Prepare your proposal with the Assessors (experts ) and

Committee members (possibly generalists) in mind

Have your grant proposal read by colleagues who have

been successful in previous SRG competitions

Take previous committee comments into account

Established scholars - avoid submitting a “Trust Me”

application – a strong record will not compensate for a

weak program, also give evidence of consistent scholarly

activity

Tips

38

Tips

Present a modest, reasonable budget (think “minimum

essential funding”)

Avoid, whenever possible, budgeting for professional

services

Link dissemination plans to research agenda –

conferences in first year?

Link student training to research needs

Use a reasonable font size; and maintain reasonable margins

Deadlines

39

NOI – Notice of Intent to Apply – August 15– Optional & Not Binding

– Very brief, easy to fill-out

Internal Deadline – check with Research Office Application Deadline – October 15

– Application available online

– www.sshrc.ca

– Print and send paper copy with attachments

40

Sport Participation Research Initiative– SRG Application

– SRG Category 4A list to Sport Canada

Other SSHRC Programs & Initiatives